|
|
Post by ChadClassic on May 26, 2006 2:49:35 GMT 1
K... your a mark.
|
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on May 26, 2006 14:28:21 GMT 1
Hadn't realized Smackdown! still came on Thursdays. HBK619  |
|
|
|
Post by ChadClassic on May 27, 2006 20:39:37 GMT 1
Oh yay... Smackdown's on tonight because... it got preempted... again... last night.
I fuckin' hate Baseball.
|
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jul 24, 2006 20:12:37 GMT 1
So with Vengeance and The Great American Bash out of the way, now begins the road to SummerSlam. What matches do you think are appropriate for this year's event, given the recent state of things? Friday Night Smackdown- World Heavyweight Champion King Booker v. Batista v. Mr. Kennedy Kennedy is intense and the feud with Batista has begun. Couple this with the "real" life heat between Booker and Dave late last spring and you have the potential for a decent shwoing. Kennedy proved that he is main event material at GAB.- Rey Mysterio v. Chavo Guerrero This is a no brainer, provided they will keep the heat going for another month with some solid action and a good storyline. Glad the belt is off Rey though.- United States Champion Finlay v. Matt Hardy Matt Hardy was Cruiserweight Title material back in 2003, not 2006. Although last minute injuries to the Smackdown! roster make this understandable, I think he needs to move up the card. He is one of the few that have proven to stay healthy and WWE needs to capatilize. And with Lashley out, this is the perfect time.OR - United States Champion Finlay v. The Boogeyman If the wormeater is healthy, we'd like to see how Little Bastard would handle a spotted face and buckets full of worms.- I don't know what to say about the Undertaker here, but due to the staredown at the end of the Punjabi Prison Match, it looks like we'll be stuck with another one. |
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jul 24, 2006 21:40:42 GMT 1
Sorry, got interrupted by some titties and now part two of this post:
Monday Night RAW
- Hulk Hogan v. Randy Orton
It's already signed. My only question is "why?"
- DX v. The McMahons
I think this feud has run its course, but expect the blowoff here. These days, the WWE has become efficient at starting what seems to be a good feud and draaaaaaggging it into the dirt. This is a prime example. Anyway, I expect a Randy Orton run-in and the beginning of Orton/HHH. (Would prefer Cena/Orton though)
- WWE Champion Edge v. John Cena Tables, Ladders, and Chairs
You know you want to see this, so why not now. And besides this feud is almost 7 months old. Time to put the belt back on Cena so both parties can move on to something else.
- Intercontinental Champion Johnny Nitro v. Carlito - No comment
- Kane v. Umaga - No comment
- Mick Foley v. Ric Flair - Again, no comment
[glow=red,2,300]ECW (Tuesdays)[/glow]
- ECW Champion The Big Show v. RVD v. Kurt Angle v. Sabu
Don't know if an ECW match will make it to the second most "important" PPV of the year, but if it does, this is the one I would want to see. Preferably a Fatal-Four Way elimination but a simple four way would work as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by eCo on Jul 25, 2006 19:21:03 GMT 1
As of right now the only thing on Raw that I can really look forward to is the feud between Hogan and Randy Orton. This feud has potential to be a classic feud and I really wish they could make this feud something that could be valued upon. This is also a chance to give Randy Orton an "evil" image on him in which that he doesn't care how wrong it is, he just gets what he wants. This could also restore the old fashion concept of the traditional good vs evil concept.
My main problem with Raw right now is the spirit squad, and that's because they really aren't looked at as talented individuals but just as 5 individuals but together as a single superstar. Also with the fact how they are horrible actors, and they are gimmicked base performers, makes me dislike them even more. I'm not questioning their in ring skills even though some of them are very sloppy in the ring, and the whole fact that I can't name the good ones from the bad ones prooves that they have no value to their names and they are in the main event.
|
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jul 25, 2006 19:33:19 GMT 1
Rest assured that the Spirit Squad's time in the limelight will soon be over. I cannot name one from the other either but what does it matter anyway. They have been repeatedly buried and its simply a matter of time. They took a 2 on 5 beatdown on PPV and then to make matters worse--on national TV. And seeing that the World Tag Team titles haven't meant shit in about 3 years in WWE, it's safe to sayt that they are done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Fizz Allmendinger on Jul 25, 2006 19:59:20 GMT 1
There is rumors going around that DX and NWO are facing each other at surviour series this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by stocko on Jul 25, 2006 20:07:42 GMT 1
and where did you read this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Simz on Jul 25, 2006 20:16:17 GMT 1
What would be very interesting. I'm extremly excited about survivor series this year. It's my fav ppv of the year. But with it being series 20. Could be very special!
|
|
|
|
Post by Aladdin on Jul 25, 2006 20:44:03 GMT 1
I'm guessing ECW Vs. WWE.
|
|
|
|
Post by brockandsable on Jul 25, 2006 21:57:49 GMT 1
There is rumors going around that DX and NWO are facing each other at surviour series this year. As lofty as that sounds, I doubt we'll ever see Scott Hall in a WWE ring again. But then again.... And I second Micko: I would like to know the source of this information else I toss it as a grain of salt.... |
|
|
|
Post by Stare on Jul 26, 2006 0:23:32 GMT 1
Nash is under contract with TNA to the best of my knowledge also, so yeah.
As for Summerslam, I dont know what we'll see for sure, but I have a feeling that we coudl see Umaga vs. HHH. If Umaga takes out HBK next Monday, it would give him the credibility he needs as a monster, give HBK his time for surgery, and would give Umaga a credible feud agianst someone who can carry him, like HHH.
|
|
|
|
Post by eCo on Jul 26, 2006 1:12:58 GMT 1
There is rumors going around that DX and NWO are facing each other at surviour series this year. If that ever did happen, it would be the best thing to happen to the WWE in the past 4 years. It could have a civil war type of angle in the old kliq. As for seeing Scott Hall in the WWE ring again, I would love to see him in the ring. He is one of the most underrated and misused wrestlers of all time. It's very sad he never got the credit he deserved. |
|
|
|
Post by Reaper on Jul 26, 2006 6:22:34 GMT 1
How high are you? Honestly dude, stop being a mark for like 5 minutes and look at what you said.
DX vs. The nWo WOULD have been the best thing to happen to wrestling... in 1998 or so. But today, not only would it be garabage, but it would be a heaping pile of OLD crap that would be one of the sloppiest looking clusterfucks you've ever had the misfortune of seeing.
I mean lets look at the players here for a second.
Nash= Broken down, and is really only an asset on the microphone anymore.
Hall- while I agree with what you said about him, NOW he would just look like a chubby shadow of himself.
Hogan- He'd be the one being carried through this on a wrestling level and probably would demand he won in the end.
Trips- While he isn't exactly the worst wrestler in the bunch, he's really just a touch and go type of performer, his good days to bad days are comparible.
HBK- Would be the stand out performer and at the end of the night would probably get the least amount of credit.
Thats the end really, DX doesn't have any other memebers available to be used and nWo could just keep adding random people that were in it from its inception because the fact is over half of them have no steady jobs.
1998 this would work.
2006 or beyond... No, not a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Fizz Allmendinger on Jul 26, 2006 10:04:00 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by eCo on Jul 26, 2006 18:55:05 GMT 1
^Sorry I wouldn't consider that I reliable source  How high are you? Honestly dude, stop being a mark for like 5 minutes and look at what you said. DX vs. The nWo WOULD have been the best thing to happen to wrestling... in 1998 or so. But today, not only would it be garabage, but it would be a heaping pile of OLD crap that would be one of the sloppiest looking clusterfucks you've ever had the misfortune of seeing. I mean lets look at the players here for a second. Nash= Broken down, and is really only an asset on the microphone anymore. Hall- while I agree with what you said about him, NOW he would just look like a chubby shadow of himself. Hogan- He'd be the one being carried through this on a wrestling level and probably would demand he won in the end. Trips- While he isn't exactly the worst wrestler in the bunch, he's really just a touch and go type of performer, his good days to bad days are comparible. HBK- Would be the stand out performer and at the end of the night would probably get the least amount of credit. Thats the end really, DX doesn't have any other memebers available to be used and nWo could just keep adding random people that were in it from its inception because the fact is over half of them have no steady jobs. 1998 this would work. 2006 or beyond... No, not a good idea. *sigh* You can call me a mark all you want but I can say for a fact that I am one of the very few people here who actually values and considers the importance of big names. Everyone is so stuck with this new talent that many people fail to realize that what good is new talent, if they are stuck with a bunch of other "no names". If people such as Hall and Nash would return to the WWE, it would restore some of the value to the WWE's product just because of the fact that they are part of the WWE. Fact is that: big names=more value to the product As for your statements about the individuals here are some things you left out. Nash: Even though he is not in the best condition, he was still an asset to the WWE in 2003. I truly believe his HIAC match against HHH at Bad Blood was very undderated. He can still throw a good match, even at his state. Hall: One of the most undderated superstars, I know he will never be back in the WWE, but it would be nice to see Hall end his career one a positive and meaningful angle. Hogan: I never considered that he would be part of this angle because he isn't a member of the clique. HHH: worked with all of these individuals in the past so he will now how to put the match together. HBK: You say how he will get the least credit, but last time I checked HBK virtually ran the clique back in the early 90s. IF (a big if) a final match was to happen, it wouldn't be all about credit, but HBK will get overrall credit because in the WWE ring, HHH and his name has more value than Hall and Nash. |
|
|
|
Post by Reaper on Jul 26, 2006 22:16:58 GMT 1
Wrong, as usual big names don't mean jack shit homie, for proof see the ratings for SNME. Hogan's appearance did nothing, want more proof of "big Names" then see TNA. They got the big names of the past and they aren't doing a damn thing for the product.
The HIAC with Trips and Nash was craptacular. Nobody cared for it as it did nothing for either person in the match. It was a waste of a big match to be honest. Hall isn't as good nor fresh as he used to be. Not to mention he wasn't looking to be in the best of shape in the first place the last time I saw him. So he's lost a step too. If you wanted to throw Waltman in the mix since he's "Kliq" material, then while he would have the MOST underrated performance overall and would get 0 recognition because the WWE fans were basically trained to hate him, he would put on the second best performance, however. If he's not to be included then its basically just down to the outsiders and HBK and HHH.
I was saying HBK wouldn't get the credit because of Hogan, but if Hogan weren't in the thing anyways, then HBK would most likely either do one of 2 things.
He'd either bow out and let HHH take the credit or he'd swerve and align with the other side and make it more interesting in the end and have a blow off with Triple H sometime later. Overall though, the point that this match would be better suited to 8 years ago is still valid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stare on Jul 27, 2006 0:14:25 GMT 1
Let me put this into perspective for you. If Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, & Kevin Nash were in the WWE During the attitude era, do you HONESLTY think that Stone Cold, The Rock, or Triple H would've ever gotten any attention?
Putting emphasis on the old stars does nothing for the future of the company. You can't live on the past forever.
Where do you think those "big names" came from? I feel like this will be one of the greatest points I've ever made, but at some points . . . those BIG NAMES were "new". If you don't create stars out of the new guys, you will never have any big names for the future. Jesus dude, I would hope you could've figured that one out.
|
|
|
|
Post by eCo on Jul 28, 2006 18:56:07 GMT 1
Let me put this into perspective for you. If Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, & Kevin Nash were in the WWE During the attitude era, do you HONESLTY think that Stone Cold, The Rock, or Triple H would've ever gotten any attention? Putting emphasis on the old stars does nothing for the future of the company. You can't live on the past forever. Where do you think those "big names" came from? I feel like this will be one of the greatest points I've ever made, but at some points . . . those BIG NAMES were "new". If you don't create stars out of the new guys, you will never have any big names for the future. Jesus dude, I would hope you could've figured that one out. As a matter of fact, people such as The Rock, Stone Cold, and Triple H would have risen if people like Hogan and Macho Man were around. Big names rise because other big names support them. Imagine if Stone Cold was first begining to go popular and the whole Stone Cold mania was about to rise while the nWo was around with Hogan in charge. That would have been a feud people would have never have forgotten about. The reason why names today don't really have that much value is because of how very few big names put them over. People like HBK, Bret Hart, and The Undertaker put Stone Cold over. I believe in creating new names, I just don't like the idea of irrationally putting excessive people in the main event just because they get minimum pop from the crowd. Oh and some people always bitch that some big names refuse to put people over, I think that's crap also. The truth is that people like the Undertaker, Triple H, and Hulk Hogan aren't made to put new talent over just because their new. The only time they do put talent over is only when they should put talent over, in which the talent is actually worth being put over. But now the whole mood is that if he is new, he gets put over and rushed into the main event (such as Umaga, Spirit Squad, etc.). |
|
|
|
Post by Stare on Jul 29, 2006 1:46:45 GMT 1
Wrong again.
You need to watch The Monday Night Wars. The only reason the WWE even pushed these guys is because they had no one else to rely on. While WCW had all the BIG names, WWE had no one to put the focus on, and that is the only reason Austin, Rock, and HHH had the spotlight put on them. Now, it is unfair for me to say there is NO WAY they would've gotten as big, but it would've been much more unlikely had WWE still had all of it's stars instead of WCW.
|
|
|
|
Post by KillerSundin (Formerly HBK) on Jul 29, 2006 2:01:12 GMT 1
All in all, NWO vs DX would suck. HBK and Triple H would do everything and NWO would be carried through the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great JT on Jul 29, 2006 5:14:56 GMT 1
The WWE is so far away from the 80's/90's WWF glory days it's hard to believe they are the same company. From Hulk Hogan's debut up 'til about 1998/1999, the WWF was undisputably the best wrestling organization out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spackle on Jul 29, 2006 5:16:59 GMT 1
Dude, what the FUCK are you talking about?
Late 80's/early 90's fucking blew. And Mid 90's was all about wcw.
|
|
|
|
Post by eCo on Jul 29, 2006 18:51:35 GMT 1
^
First off I have to dissagree totally over what Spackle said. The late 80s and the early 90s were a classic time for the WWF. During that time, faces were the ideal heroes and heels were classic villians. People such as Hulk Hogan, Macho Man, Ric Flair and Jake the Snake were ideal characters and some of the best and more rememorable promos and matches happened during that time. The mid-90s were the dark ages of wrestling. Sure WCW had some good stuff, but none of it was long term. The only thing the WCW really had was a couple of good angles and a few billion dollar contracts.
As for Stares statement, I have to dissagree again, because it is the WWF/E that makes the big names and always had a way of making them rise above the previous names. However, one would say that if someone like Hogan or Nash was in the WWF during 1997, they would say how "Hogan or Nash would never put someone like Stone Cold over", but as I stated before if someone like Hogan or the Undertaker does consider that someone could become an icon, they would be willing to put that name over, and if there is a dissagreement, Vince would be smart enough to swallow his pride and take the risk of Hogan leaving the WWF/E, again. But I truly believe that the idea of how "Hogan just wants to keep everyone down" is total bullshit, because he has put over MANY people in the past. The WWF was smart enough to push the right people at the right time during the attitude era.
Serious, it annoys me how people always go off and say how "the WWE is the worst thing in professional wrestling history" but they fail to consider this fact: that if WCW won the monday night wars, there would be even more politics, names being held down, and much fewer pushes, because WCW is fueled only by Ted Turner's billion dollar contracts. Brooker T and DDP would have never been champion because of how the WCW wouldn't feel the need to push them. And all of these 12 year old kids would go off and say how better the WWF was than WCW.
|
|
[/center]
